Keeping guns from criminals - liberals, what is your plan?

[hunarcy]

Any attempt to outlaw firearms would focus also on its component parts – those that comprise the firearm itself and those that comprise the ammunition and any specialized machinery used to produce these items. Legitimate companies would be limited to producing these items for the police, Armed Forces, etc.

The consequences for possessing firearms and ammunition would have to be severe - lengthy prison sentences starting at somewhere around twenty years. The penalty for smuggling these items across our borders would be even harsher, perhaps even life sentences.

The security of our borders adjacent to neighboring countries and oceans would have to be strengthened far beyond what they are today. A large number of special law enforcement agents would be required, with the power to search any home without warrant or probable cause. The existing police across the country would require a strengthening of their forces. The National Guard and the military would need to be on alert in case of an uprising from pro-gun factions.

Only extreme measures like this would have a chance of keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals and potential criminals.


It is not a likely scenario.

Such a limitation would be just as unconstitutional as poll taxes and grandfather clauses...anything that prevents a person from exercising their rights (unless through their own actions and after a due process hearing) is unconstitutional.

 

[Afterword]

Any attempt to outlaw firearms would focus also on its component parts – those that comprise the firearm itself and those that comprise the ammunition and any specialized machinery used to produce these items. Legitimate companies would be limited to producing these items for the police, Armed Forces, etc.

The consequences for possessing firearms and ammunition would have to be severe - lengthy prison sentences starting at somewhere around twenty years. The penalty for smuggling these items across our borders would be even harsher, perhaps even life sentences.

The security of our borders adjacent to neighboring countries and oceans would have to be strengthened far beyond what they are today. A large number of special law enforcement agents would be required, with the power to search any home without warrant or probable cause. The existing police across the country would require a strengthening of their forces. The National Guard and the military would need to be on alert in case of an uprising from pro-gun factions.

Only extreme measures like this would have a chance of keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals and potential criminals.


It is not a likely scenario.

Such a limitation would be just as unconstitutional as poll taxes and grandfather clauses...anything that prevents a person from exercising their rights (unless through their own actions and after a due process hearing) is unconstitutional.

Like I said: "It is not a likely scenario." However, I would not be so certain that it could never happen.

 

[candycorn]

Elect Hillary

 

[kaz]

Been reading the responses and recognizing you're going down like the ho you are?

I'm a ho????

The idea that in the bill of rights, which protects our liberties, the founding fathers gave government the power to "regulate" guns is just stupid. Regulated doesn't mean government regulations.

Why would they write that guns are a personal liberty (in the ... Bill of Rights ...), but then say it's up to government what rights we have?

========
Do you have any idea how stupid and ignorant you seem when you claim " Regulated doesn't mean government regulations." Who the hell else is going to regulate things if it isn't the government?

I always knew you gun masturbaters were nuts and now you've proved it.

' Regulation doesn't mean regulation ' is what the man claims. haw haw haaw haw

The word regulation is anyone who is controlling anything. There is nothing in the word that is intrinsically government. What government school gave you your crappy education?

In the case of the 2nd Amendment, "well regulated" meant in good working order, as in a well regulated clock. The founding fathers knew a disorganized militia would be but cannon fodder in the face of an organized army. They wanted a militia with officers with military experience and well trained, well disciplined and well armed and provisioned troops.
A militia encumbered by silly regulations written by self serving politicians was not their vision.

I agree obviously. The point you didn't address though is who decides if a militia is "well regulated." That it's in the Bill of Rights shows the answer to that is not the Federal government. And the fourteenth Amendment says it's not the States either. It's the people

 

[kaz]

Elect Hillary

I'd agree to electing her dog catcher except I don't want to do that to dogs

 

[Contumacious]

Every time there's a shooting, liberals run around saying this proves we need more gun laws. I ask liberals over and over how exactly you are going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals every time you say you want more gun laws.

In particular, address given that drugs are illegal, and yet any parent knows any kid can get as much pot as they want. There are millions of guns in the US, millions more in the world. So don't just say more laws, explain how more laws are going to actually work.

So, there have been 7 shootings killing at least 10 people in the last decade. The only thing you've achieved so far is that no one was shooting back.

Their "plan" is to disarm ALL law abiding citizens.

.


.

 

[kaz]

Every time there's a shooting, liberals run around saying this proves we need more gun laws. I ask liberals over and over how exactly you are going to keep guns out of the hands of criminals every time you say you want more gun laws.

In particular, address given that drugs are illegal, and yet any parent knows any kid can get as much pot as they want. There are millions of guns in the US, millions more in the world. So don't just say more laws, explain how more laws are going to actually work.

So, there have been 7 shootings killing at least 10 people in the last decade. The only thing you've achieved so far is that no one was shooting back.

Their "plan" is to disarm ALL law abiding citizens.

.


.

Yep, they don't care about criminals. They want to disarm anyone who could oppose their suckling at government tits

 

[candycorn]

Elect Hillary

I'd agree to electing her dog catcher except I don't want to do that to dogs

We'll install her as President. Don't worry, you don't need to do anything except keep on doing what you have been. American, when asked, almost always reject hate and bigotry which happen to be the names of the two horses pulling the GOP chariot.

 

[kaz]

Elect Hillary

I'd agree to electing her dog catcher except I don't want to do that to dogs

We'll install her as President. Don't worry, you don't need to do anything except keep on doing what you have been. American, when asked, almost always reject hate and bigotry which happen to be the names of the two horses pulling the GOP chariot.

Hate and bigotry? Who do I hate and who am I biased against? Sounds like you're the one projecting.

kaz: Everyone deserves an equal opportunity

candy: Wow, what hate and bigotry!!!!!!!!!

Yeah

 

[candycorn]

Elect Hillary

I'd agree to electing her dog catcher except I don't want to do that to dogs

We'll install her as President. Don't worry, you don't need to do anything except keep on doing what you have been. American, when asked, almost always reject hate and bigotry which happen to be the names of the two horses pulling the GOP chariot.

Hate and bigotry? Who do I hate and who am I biased against? Sounds like you're the one projecting.

kaz: Everyone deserves an equal opportunity

candy: Wow, what hate and bigotry!!!!!!!!!

Yeah

Are you voting for Trump?

 

[kaz]

Elect Hillary

I'd agree to electing her dog catcher except I don't want to do that to dogs

We'll install her as President. Don't worry, you don't need to do anything except keep on doing what you have been. American, when asked, almost always reject hate and bigotry which happen to be the names of the two horses pulling the GOP chariot.

Hate and bigotry? Who do I hate and who am I biased against? Sounds like you're the one projecting.

kaz: Everyone deserves an equal opportunity

candy: Wow, what hate and bigotry!!!!!!!!!

Yeah

Are you voting for Trump?

This just in, Kaz endorses ...

Why I will not now or ever advocate, argue for or endorse Trump

 

[candycorn]

Elect Hillary

I'd agree to electing her dog catcher except I don't want to do that to dogs

We'll install her as President. Don't worry, you don't need to do anything except keep on doing what you have been. American, when asked, almost always reject hate and bigotry which happen to be the names of the two horses pulling the GOP chariot.

Hate and bigotry? Who do I hate and who am I biased against? Sounds like you're the one projecting.

kaz: Everyone deserves an equal opportunity

candy: Wow, what hate and bigotry!!!!!!!!!

Yeah

Are you voting for Trump?

This just in, Kaz endorses ...

Why I will not now or ever advocate, argue for or endorse Trump

Is Trump the GOP nominee for President?

 

[kaz]

I'd agree to electing her dog catcher except I don't want to do that to dogs

We'll install her as President. Don't worry, you don't need to do anything except keep on doing what you have been. American, when asked, almost always reject hate and bigotry which happen to be the names of the two horses pulling the GOP chariot.

Hate and bigotry? Who do I hate and who am I biased against? Sounds like you're the one projecting.

kaz: Everyone deserves an equal opportunity

candy: Wow, what hate and bigotry!!!!!!!!!

Yeah

Are you voting for Trump?

This just in, Kaz endorses ...

Why I will not now or ever advocate, argue for or endorse Trump

Is Trump the GOP nominee for President?

Yes. And?

 

[candycorn]

We'll install her as President. Don't worry, you don't need to do anything except keep on doing what you have been. American, when asked, almost always reject hate and bigotry which happen to be the names of the two horses pulling the GOP chariot.

Hate and bigotry? Who do I hate and who am I biased against? Sounds like you're the one projecting.

kaz: Everyone deserves an equal opportunity

candy: Wow, what hate and bigotry!!!!!!!!!

Yeah

Are you voting for Trump?

This just in, Kaz endorses ...

Why I will not now or ever advocate, argue for or endorse Trump

Is Trump the GOP nominee for President?

Yes. And?

Ahh yes, the stable master for Bigotry (about Mexicans he says, "I assume some are good people." and now he jokes about "2nd Amendment Folk" who may want to eliminate the HRC.

 

[Ernie S.]

I'm a ho????

The idea that in the bill of rights, which protects our liberties, the founding fathers gave government the power to "regulate" guns is just stupid. Regulated doesn't mean government regulations.

Why would they write that guns are a personal liberty (in the ... Bill of Rights ...), but then say it's up to government what rights we have?

========
Do you have any idea how stupid and ignorant you seem when you claim " Regulated doesn't mean government regulations." Who the hell else is going to regulate things if it isn't the government?

I always knew you gun masturbaters were nuts and now you've proved it.

' Regulation doesn't mean regulation ' is what the man claims. haw haw haaw haw

The word regulation is anyone who is controlling anything. There is nothing in the word that is intrinsically government. What government school gave you your crappy education?

In the case of the 2nd Amendment, "well regulated" meant in good working order, as in a well regulated clock. The founding fathers knew a disorganized militia would be but cannon fodder in the face of an organized army. They wanted a militia with officers with military experience and well trained, well disciplined and well armed and provisioned troops.
A militia encumbered by silly regulations written by self serving politicians was not their vision.

I agree obviously. The point you didn't address though is who decides if a militia is "well regulated." That it's in the Bill of Rights shows the answer to that is not the Federal government. And the fourteenth Amendment says it's not the States either. It's the people

People or the officers of the militias that were appointed by the states at the time.

 

[kaz]

The idea that in the bill of rights, which protects our liberties, the founding fathers gave government the power to "regulate" guns is just stupid. Regulated doesn't mean government regulations.

Why would they write that guns are a personal liberty (in the ... Bill of Rights ...), but then say it's up to government what rights we have?

========
Do you have any idea how stupid and ignorant you seem when you claim " Regulated doesn't mean government regulations." Who the hell else is going to regulate things if it isn't the government?

I always knew you gun masturbaters were nuts and now you've proved it.

' Regulation doesn't mean regulation ' is what the man claims. haw haw haaw haw

The word regulation is anyone who is controlling anything. There is nothing in the word that is intrinsically government. What government school gave you your crappy education?

In the case of the 2nd Amendment, "well regulated" meant in good working order, as in a well regulated clock. The founding fathers knew a disorganized militia would be but cannon fodder in the face of an organized army. They wanted a militia with officers with military experience and well trained, well disciplined and well armed and provisioned troops.
A militia encumbered by silly regulations written by self serving politicians was not their vision.

I agree obviously. The point you didn't address though is who decides if a militia is "well regulated." That it's in the Bill of Rights shows the answer to that is not the Federal government. And the fourteenth Amendment says it's not the States either. It's the people

People or the officers of the militias that were appointed by the states at the time.

I'm not clear what you're arguing

 

[hunarcy]

The idea that in the bill of rights, which protects our liberties, the founding fathers gave government the power to "regulate" guns is just stupid. Regulated doesn't mean government regulations.

Why would they write that guns are a personal liberty (in the ... Bill of Rights ...), but then say it's up to government what rights we have?

========
Do you have any idea how stupid and ignorant you seem when you claim " Regulated doesn't mean government regulations." Who the hell else is going to regulate things if it isn't the government?

I always knew you gun masturbaters were nuts and now you've proved it.

' Regulation doesn't mean regulation ' is what the man claims. haw haw haaw haw

The word regulation is anyone who is controlling anything. There is nothing in the word that is intrinsically government. What government school gave you your crappy education?

In the case of the 2nd Amendment, "well regulated" meant in good working order, as in a well regulated clock. The founding fathers knew a disorganized militia would be but cannon fodder in the face of an organized army. They wanted a militia with officers with military experience and well trained, well disciplined and well armed and provisioned troops.
A militia encumbered by silly regulations written by self serving politicians was not their vision.

I agree obviously. The point you didn't address though is who decides if a militia is "well regulated." That it's in the Bill of Rights shows the answer to that is not the Federal government. And the fourteenth Amendment says it's not the States either. It's the people

People or the officers of the militias that were appointed by the states at the time.

No, the members of the militia elected their own officers. How can you not know that?

 

[Rustic]

Buy more guns and ammo...

 

[Ernie S.]

========
Do you have any idea how stupid and ignorant you seem when you claim " Regulated doesn't mean government regulations." Who the hell else is going to regulate things if it isn't the government?

I always knew you gun masturbaters were nuts and now you've proved it.

' Regulation doesn't mean regulation ' is what the man claims. haw haw haaw haw

The word regulation is anyone who is controlling anything. There is nothing in the word that is intrinsically government. What government school gave you your crappy education?

In the case of the 2nd Amendment, "well regulated" meant in good working order, as in a well regulated clock. The founding fathers knew a disorganized militia would be but cannon fodder in the face of an organized army. They wanted a militia with officers with military experience and well trained, well disciplined and well armed and provisioned troops.
A militia encumbered by silly regulations written by self serving politicians was not their vision.

I agree obviously. The point you didn't address though is who decides if a militia is "well regulated." That it's in the Bill of Rights shows the answer to that is not the Federal government. And the fourteenth Amendment says it's not the States either. It's the people

People or the officers of the militias that were appointed by the states at the time.

I'm not clear what you're arguing

Not arguing...
The officers were responsible for seeing that they commanded a "well regulated" militia. The officers were appointed by the States.

 

[Ernie S.]

========
Do you have any idea how stupid and ignorant you seem when you claim " Regulated doesn't mean government regulations." Who the hell else is going to regulate things if it isn't the government?

I always knew you gun masturbaters were nuts and now you've proved it.

' Regulation doesn't mean regulation ' is what the man claims. haw haw haaw haw

The word regulation is anyone who is controlling anything. There is nothing in the word that is intrinsically government. What government school gave you your crappy education?

In the case of the 2nd Amendment, "well regulated" meant in good working order, as in a well regulated clock. The founding fathers knew a disorganized militia would be but cannon fodder in the face of an organized army. They wanted a militia with officers with military experience and well trained, well disciplined and well armed and provisioned troops.
A militia encumbered by silly regulations written by self serving politicians was not their vision.

I agree obviously. The point you didn't address though is who decides if a militia is "well regulated." That it's in the Bill of Rights shows the answer to that is not the Federal government. And the fourteenth Amendment says it's not the States either. It's the people

People or the officers of the militias that were appointed by the states at the time.

No, the members of the militia elected their own officers. How can you not know that?

Perhaps you should actually read the Constitution...
Article I, Section 8, Clause 16
The Congress shall have Power To ...provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress....